Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII

On June 22 2012 10:47 ShiaoPi wrote:
##Vote: Release

SCUM DETECTED!

On June 22 2012 12:14 Mordanis wrote:
I'm not even in this game, but I know what to do
##Vote: Release
I can't wait to see the red blood squirting from your severed carotid as your head rolls down the street and becomes the soccer-ball for the local under 8 soccer team.
+ Show Spoiler +

On June 24 2012 12:34 TehTemplar wrote:
is it too late to /obs? :o
Or am I incredibly stupid and all I need to do is read the thread?

On June 25 2012 11:34 dNa wrote:


##FOS: Release
this seems like very flawed logic to me. You can very well accuse someone of being scum without lying. Saying things like "I 'think' X is scum" ; "i 'suspect' X of being scum" and so forth and giving logical reasons on what led you to this conclusion is in no way come by as a lie. Of course if someone bluntly states "X is scum" without reasoning behind it, it is pretty surely much more suspicious for the poster itself.
in my opinion you just try to stir up this whole thing a bit, by directly voting for him, so I'll keep my eye on you.

On June 25 2012 11:34 dNa wrote:


##FOS: Release
this seems like very flawed logic to me. You can very well accuse someone of being scum without lying. Saying things like "I 'think' X is scum" ; "i 'suspect' X of being scum" and so forth and giving logical reasons on what led you to this conclusion is in no way come by as a lie. Of course if someone bluntly states "X is scum" without reasoning behind it, it is pretty surely much more suspicious for the poster itself.
in my opinion you just try to stir up this whole thing a bit, by directly voting for him, so I'll keep my eye on you.

On June 25 2012 12:12 dNa wrote:
I'm honestly pretty convinced that the statement you gave as example there can be seen as a "suspicion", not as a statement of a fact.
And while blazing in your example states that toad is scum and that's not the case, it should be pretty obvious that that he is just suspecting it, because there is no way of him knowing it for a fact. But that might be just arguing semantics at that point, let's drop it.

Instead I would like to hear what policy you would suggest, since you are obviously not happy with the policy that was originally proposed. Maybe I like it better than the original one too, I am not too familiar with different policies in this game.

On June 25 2012 12:22 Keirathi wrote:


FOS: Release

I don't see any situation where our infestation of evil (Mafia) can get out of this situation without lying. They can bend truths and suggest things that seem scummy, but in the end, they know who they are and who we are and will have to tell some lies or, at the very least, half truths.

Making a case that someone is scum isn't lying, assuming you are town and you have some kind of reasoning that drew you to that conclusion. Being wrong != lying.

Now, with all that said, your flawed logic isn't the reason for my suspicion towards you. Fast voting someone who has an argument with you is no way to catch the perps. If you honestly think someone disagreeing with your initial logic (which in this case was actually a disagreeing logic to *ANOTHER* person), then you're just asking to lynch innocent people because they have different ideas than you.

On June 25 2012 12:19 dNa wrote:


That is not what that was trying to say. I was just saying directly voting for him seems a bit severe to me, and like a complete overreaction for what he has done (which is propose a policy). I guess you just wanted to take a shot in the dark, because the reasoning behind that vote seems very thin to me.

On June 25 2012 12:13 Hopeless1der wrote:
Any statement preceeded by "I think..." is inherently true until a contradictory "I think.."or similar statement is made.
Nevertheless Release's logic should be addressed and I will concede that I committed the same error that he did prior to his EBWOP: equating truth to honesty, which are not the same.

Basically if someone decides to flip flop on a decision without some ironclad reasoning, I'm saying lynch the sucker

On June 25 2012 12:53 Hopeless1der wrote:
To further clarify my response to Release:

I'm saying lynch people that we can collectively agree have been dishonest in something they have said or done.

Further discussions on what constitutes 'dishonesty' may follow at a later time, or right now if whoever is reading this should so happen to desire.

On June 25 2012 13:01 Keirathi wrote:
@Release: You completely glossed over the important section of my post. More scum for the scum train.

Getting all read to bandwagon someone who had a policy idea that you didn't agree with less than 2 hours intot he game will when you no friends, no matter how much discussion it spawned. Your post with the ##Vote line = good discussion. Your post with the ##Vote line = mind boggling.

On June 25 2012 13:15 Keirathi wrote:
Yes I meant win. Sorry my typing was atrocious, its late.

As far as "friends", its way too early to know who I can trust. Need to hear some input from other people, but for now, yes you are my leading candidate. I 100% feel that your vote was too premature and has no reasonable explanation other than "to get the ball rolling", which is a terrible reason to vote. It accomplishes nothing other than to put a vote on someone who has a 75% chance of being a townie for the SOLE REASON that he had a good intentioned, albeit impossible, idea for a lynch policy.

On June 25 2012 20:23 Esspen wrote:
I do not get all that "lynch the liar" for several reasons. Townies obviously cannot know whether someone lied or not, only clues they can grasp onto are inconsistencies and vagueness. The only players who know the truth are scums and if the whole game is going to revole around us identifying who lied, mafia is going to win rather easy. Mafia can win just by ereasing their memory that they are mafia and simply playing with a mindset of a townie, leaving townies lyinching each other as they find innocent inconsistencies in their speeches (ie posts). Secondly, even blues have to lie in order to survive.

But that also means when I say "I am mafia." you should lynch me no matter whether it is true or not, as if I'm telling the truth, you just lynched mafia, and if it is not true you lynched liar. (breaks my heart )

But I believe we should try to identify and lynch blues first, confusing mafia and leaving them vulnerable...

On June 25 2012 22:27 JieXian wrote:


shit I just noticed that this wasn't what i thought it was. This actually means that we have 2 days to vote right?


Release's game plan seems to be:

1) Create escape route. (just in case he got mafia)

2) Create chaos
3) Claim it leads to more productive posting
4) Hide with aforementioned excuse



Vivax and I found that confusing = We must be mafia lolololol

On June 25 2012 22:27 JieXian wrote:


shit I just noticed that this wasn't what i thought it was. This actually means that we have 2 days to vote right?


Release's game plan seems to be:

1) Create escape route. (just in case he got mafia)

So night. I will be less active in the following days (until night 3) for aforementioned reasons.

2) Create chaos
3) Claim it leads to more productive posting
4) Hide with aforementioned excuse



Vivax and I found that confusing = We must be mafia lolololol

On June 25 2012 12:57 BioSC wrote:


Right now would be the perfect time to discuss it, seeing as we've been talking about it since game start. Now would be a good time to say some things, seeing as how you have the first vote and all.

On June 27 2012 18:01 JieXian wrote:
Doing his thing by not contributing anything.

For example, you obviously are contributing. Get it right?

Actually I'm spoilt for choices between Release, Esspen (plus hopeless earlier) and lurkers, just like I said earlier. What's keeping me from voting lurkers is my game plan of scummy behavior > lurkers.

I chose Release because he's the most chaotic/irritating + confusing + noisy as you can see, but I'm not leaning too hard on him. As I said if I were around I'd have changed my vote.

On June 27 2012 19:25 Vivax wrote:
Esspen voted for hopeless when rofl was set to lynch, as already mentioned.

If one of them is scum, the other most likely is, too. With the current information available, I would go for one of them.

Also remember that posting cases during the night can make you a target for scum.
Speaking of it, I think I'm the designed nightkill simply cause noone suspected me yet. Townies who are believed to be townies are dangerous for scum, and I didn't see any blue role vibes for them to use yet, so they don't have many alternatives.